Chapter 5 – The Organizing and Functioning of the Profession of Arms in Canada
Section 5.1 – Introduction
In 2005, Bill Bentley, the lead author of Duty with Honour: The Profession of Arms in Canada, asserted that the greatest threat to the profession of arms comes not from our potential enemies, but from within the profession itself.Footnote 62 His words seem to ring true given a consistent string of character-related crises in the CAF over multiple decades.Footnote 63 The threat comes from a lack of professionalism. Simply put, the profession of arms is weakened when military professionals do not pursue the highest standards of expertise and fall short of the ethical principles, military values and professional expectations demanded by the military ethos. This lack of understanding of how professional ideology sustains the concept of professionalism can undermine the national security of Canada, which in turn has second and third order effects in reduced trust in the institution, recruiting shortfalls, reduced readiness and military effectiveness.
The military profession has two basic tasks known as imperatives: societal and functional.Footnote 64 As stated earlier, the societal imperative is the idea that a profession must serve society, not just the profession itself. The functional imperative is the idea that a profession must maintain the highest standard of application of knowledge in that field: put simply, it must be good at what it does with the resources it has. Military professionals must balance these two imperatives not just within the military itself, but with society overall. Indeed, the balance is not something military professionals alone can control. While military professionals can control and influence many aspects of the societal imperative through their ethos and the functional imperative through their expertise, the Government of Canada has considerable influence, and in some cases, outright control over both imperatives. Democratically elected civilian officials represent their constituents’ interests on all matters of life in Canada and these interests influence the military as well.Footnote 65 The civil authority also decides when and where military force is employed, and under what conditions.Footnote 66 These features all contribute to a healthy tension between military leaders and civilian decision-makers. The study of this tension is known as civil-military relations.
The nature of civil-military relations in Canada is shown in how the Department of National Defence’s structure and governance rationalize the healthy tension between the societal and functional imperatives. These, in turn, affect the professional construct.
Section 5.2 – Civil-military Relations
Just like many military topics, the literature that constitutes the study of civil-military relations is vast and growing. Classic works like Samuel Huntington’s The Soldier and the StateFootnote 67 or Morris Janowitz’s The Professional SoldierFootnote 68 have shaped modern thought on the relationship between the military and the state for decades. This modern perspective echoes what pre-contact North American Indigenous communities understood as the necessary division between governing and warfighting.Footnote 69 Modern conceptions, however, emphasize the primacy of governance.Footnote 70 Since their publication in the mid-20th Century, these works have since been followed by volumes that have sought to advance the field and bring further insight into how the military and elected civilian decision-makers interact.Footnote 71
The point of departure, however, is the idea of the degree to which the government allows the military to exercise best professional judgement in executing its mandate. For the military professional in Canada, this best professional judgement is tempered by the government which provides for civil-military principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures, and a subsequent shared responsibility between the Government of Canada and the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS). This shared responsibilityFootnote 72 creates distinct but interdependent roles. In general, the civil authority has control over national objectives, defence policy, allocation of defence resources, deployment and employment of its armed forces. The profession of arms has authority over, for example, military doctrine, operational planning, the tactical direction of units on operations, internal organization, professional development and career management, and its code of service discipline. Two concepts are applicable here: first, the idea of active civilian control and second, the idea of shared responsibility.
Active Civilian Control and the Unequal Dialogue
Active civilian control begins with the premise that military leaders can anticipate respect for the military profession, but never expect deference from the elected civilian officials who govern.Footnote 73 Active control consists of an unequal dialogue between military leaders and the civil authority, in other words, the members of Cabinet. The inequality refers to the idea that while both parties – military and civilian – have a voice, since those who form government are civilians elected by Canadians, the government’s elected civilians have the final authority over defence matters. The CDS provides apolitical military advice to the MND, and through the MND to Cabinet, with clarity and integrity. This includes a candid assessment of what the military can and cannot accomplish based on a thorough understanding of the government’s requests. In addition, this shared responsibility manifests through the Defence Team as federal public servants work alongside military professionals to determine in detail where policy, military strategy and resources come together. Lastly, active control of the military is exercised by parliamentarians through the thorough questioning of military leaders that appear before parliamentary committees on behalf of the Minister.
Clausewitz famously counselled that war is the continuation of politics with other means.Footnote 74 War is a political act and as such, the political objective of the war must remain central. As politics is the ultimate objective in war, it follows that the dialogue surrounding war must also be unequal.Footnote 75 A second feature of the unequal dialogue is that decisions are made under conditions of uncertainty. The primacy of the voice of the civil authority helps settle disagreements that are bound to occur between military professionals on the question of national defence because it is the civil authority who will ultimately be held responsible by Canadians. Lastly, the unequal dialogue ensures that military leaders are held to account when they fail to uphold the ethics, values and expected behaviours of the profession of arms. In short, it enables decision-makers to relieve military leaders of command when needed.
A Healthy Tension
A healthy relationship between the civil authority and military leaders is not always one of harmony. The elected officials that form government have an obligation to deliver the broad agenda of government in an integrated manner, while defence officials, including the CDS, are focused on delivering the defence component of this agenda. There can often be a tension that emerges if both parties – military and governing parliamentarians – are remaining true to their mandates. “A bland pleasantness in civil-military relations” writes Eliot Cohen, an American practitioner and scholar of civil-military relations, “may also mean that civilians are evading their responsibilities or that soldiers have succumbed to the courtier mentality.”Footnote 76 Instead, should military leaders fundamentally disagree with the civil authority on matters pertaining to the defence of Canada and Canadian interest, military leaders always retain the right to resign their commission or scroll. Military advice, argues Cohen, must avoid this extreme and within the Canadian context, this healthy tension finds itself in a concept of Canadian origin – that of shared responsibility.Footnote 77
The defence of Canada is a complex undertaking and is only part of the broader provision of Canadian security. In addition, the expanding expertise required to ensure Canadian national security does not respect organizational boundaries or classic theories of civil-military relations. Instead, social, organizational, operational, as well as strategic perspectives are needed to ensure a safe and secure Canada. This all means that the military and the civil authority, while respecting the active control discussed above, also share responsibility for the security of Canada through an expanding concept of what constitutes national defence. In short, collaboration through a healthy tension and exchange of different perspectives between elected civilian and military leaders is what is needed.Footnote 78
This combination of active control and shared responsibility is supported by the concept of the Defence Team that comprises the organizational philosophy for DND.Footnote 79 As the name Defence Team suggests, military and civilian personnel work side-by-side in each other’s organizations with, at times, uniformed members reporting directly to civilians and vice versa. In fact, according to a 2015 study, some two-thirds of DND’s civilian workforce are employed within a military chain of command and approximately one thousand military members serve within a civilian hierarchy.Footnote 80 This integration of DND public servants with CAF members highlights how both active control and shared responsibility are supported within DND today.
As part of this active control and unequal dialogue with government, the military professional’s obedience to the civil authority must be absolute. There is no allowance for military professionals to publicly challenge government decisions or present views which may undermine government policies, programs, or priorities. This does not preclude them from their duty to speak the truth, even awkward truths, when presenting facts, whether in public or parliamentary committee, and at times requires deliberate preparation to ensure that integrity and trust are maintained.
Ultimately, the civil authority’s control of the military is executed through military officers and NCMx who in custom, practice, law and through the chain of command, control and direct the CAF. To ensure that the CAF remains apolitical, military professionals are subjected to limitations related to their participation in political activities, and their professional conduct and performance must at all times be non-partisan. It is for this reason that the civil authority’s ability to control the military is affected in large part by the degree to which such officers, NCMs, and every member of the profession of arms commits to professionalism.
Though outside the formal control of the profession of arms, veterans also play a pivotal role in how the profession is perceived by both government and society alike. Veterans, like former members of any other profession, are perceived by society to remain representative of the CAF after retirement. While veterans can serve an important educational and advocacy role, a veteran’s experience is intensely personal, varied and historical. Members of the CAF must remain mindful that when they become veterans, their understanding of the profession is based upon their own historical experiences and are not necessarily representative of how the current profession is adapting and evolving to fulfill its responsibility to society. This understanding must temper the veteran’s role in civil-military relations after uniformed service.
Section 5.3 – Fundamental Imperatives and the Professional Construct
The profession of arms is bound by two fundamental imperatives that define its relationship with government, Canadians, and which help to define the profession itself. The societal imperative demands that the military remain subordinate to the Government of Canada and that it fulfills its responsibility to society in a non-partisan and objective manner that reflects society’s values. The functional imperative demands that the profession guarantees high standards of military effectiveness in the fulfillment of its responsibility to society. Both imperatives are equally critical to the continued success of both the government and the military to serve Canadian society. Both have considerable influence on the professional construct shown in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1 The Fundamental Imperatives and the Professional Construct
Long description
The graphic portrays arrows from both the societal and functional imperatives fanning out to intersect with each of the professional attributes of responsibility, ethos, expertise and identity. Each of the professional attributes are subdivided into constituent elements. Responsibility is subdivided into organizational and professional elements. Ethos is subdivided into principles, values and expectations. Expertise is subdivided into core, supporting and specialized elements. Identity is subdivided into personal and professional elements.
Though required for civilian control of the profession, these imperatives can create challenges. Some of these challenges revolve around issues related to resources, the wide range of military identities, teams and sub-cultures across and external to the profession, accepting unlimited liability, and a lack of military awareness of the realities of Canada’s political system, and vice versa. These challenges can significantly impact the professional attributes of responsibility, expertise, identity, and military ethos and how the profession of arms functions in Canada. However, it is the same professional construct that strives to balance the challenges that stem from these two, potentially duelling, fundamental imperatives.
The Impact of the Imperatives on Military Expertise
Expertise is organized around a core of competencies directly related to the application of military force because the military’s role is the disciplined, ethical and legal application of (up to and including) deadly force in the defence of Canada and Canadian interests. These core competencies are supplemented by expertise in support and specialist areas that ensure that the core expertise is applied to maximum effect. This is an inevitable feature in collective professions.
Core Knowledge and Competencies
The unique theory-based knowledge at the core of the profession of arms is the General System of War and Conflict comprising of tactical, operational, strategic and policy sub-systems nested within one another in ascending order. Figure 5.2 illustrates these systems.
Figure 5.2 The General System of War and ConflictFootnote 82
Long description
The graphic portrays four circles of increasing size nested entirely within the larger circle around it. Each circle’s bottom centre is aligned with the other circles creating a nesting effect such that each larger circle contains all of the smaller circles. The smallest circle is the tactical system, the next largest the operational system, the third largest the strategic system and the largest circle represents the policy system controlled by government.
Knowledge includes tactical doctrine, the complex discipline of operational art which informs campaigns, as well as a fulsome understanding of what constitutes strategy, an understanding of civil-military relations, and command and leadership theory and practice. This knowledge is then reinforced through the daily practice of military professionalism.
Imparting this core body of knowledge and its associated competencies begins in the early socialization process of living the CAF ethos and becomes increasingly more substantive and demanding as the member progresses through a composite of education, training, employment experience and self-development opportunities. It also includes a critical self-reflection of what it means to be a military professional.
At the tactical level, the content of the core body of knowledge may be as diverse as the fighting skills of an infantry section commander as a sergeant, a frigate’s captain as a commander, a flight surgeon overseeing an aid station as a major, or an aircraft mechanic as a corporal. Orchestrating the battle at higher tactical levels and leading those joint forces at the operational level, however, requires different competencies that build upon those already acquired. At the strategic and grand-strategic levels, it is essential to have a sophisticated understanding of the complexities of modern conflict and of the best strategy to address the multiplicity of threats.
Increasingly, expertise related to joint, interagency and combined operations is also required. Whereas in the past, most expertise related to the unique features of maritime, land and air environments, now the changing character of conflict, the proliferation and diversity of hybrid threats and the opacity of grey zone threats has forced most operations to be, at a minimum, joint. However, they are more likely to be pan-domain, interagency, multinational and often combined endeavours.Footnote 83
The increasing complexity of operations is already placing higher mental demands on military decision makers to address the threat, but also to integrate the military capability with other components of the national security apparatus and remain interoperable with a diverse group of allies and external organizations. Each of the operational commanders have a responsibility to share the learning from these experiences to augment the profession’s collective expertise and capture such insights into doctrine so that they might be learned and applied to evolve and enhance military expertise. This experiential learning process is one of many which has the potential to accelerate learning towards mastery in a particular area of expertise.
Supporting and Specialized Knowledge and Competencies
Supporting competencies include everything necessary to assist a very large organization in achieving its goals. In the military’s case, this means the institutional support and sustainment needed for its forces to perform their military functions successfully. Such supporting competencies comprise additional expertise that overlap with the profession of arms. This expertise draws from a wide range of academic and professional disciplines such as, among others, history, political science, psychology, sociology, anthropology, and engineering.
Specialized competencies are addressed by the presence of dual professionals in the profession of arms in Canada. As previously discussed, these competencies cover areas that are needed in a modern profession of arms which are inefficient to produce and maintain exclusively within the military. Indeed, some dual professionals maintain their specialized competencies by working outside the profession of arms in the service of Canada more broadly.
The division of expertise between core, supporting and specialized competencies is a result of the collective nature of the profession of arms. Only through the collective, professional application of expertise can military effectiveness be achieved. Regardless of rank, position or technical speciality, each member makes an indispensable contribution to the collective whole, and thus, each is a member of the profession of arms, first and foremost.
The Impact of the Imperatives on Military Identity
The military ethos sets the foundation for our professional military identity across the CAF. It is from this foundation that other military identities develop. Military identity is just as, if not more diversified than, its expertise. Professional identities across the CAF are associated first by command (navy, army, air force, special operations forces) and rank (officer, NCM). Further divisions and categories of rank produce junior, intermediate and senior identities based on experience within the officer and NCM rank structure. Identity is also subdivided into operational roles and support roles, and into more than one hundred specific occupations and their sub-specialty qualifications. Identity is also influenced by the participation of military professionals in different operations. Military identity intersects with non-military identities in the case of dual professionals or the non-Regular Force components of the military; the Reserve Force including the Canadian Rangers and COATS. Military identity is not a single, homogenous concept but rather a collective concept with a common goal – the defence of Canada.
Military professionals find fulfillment in their professional identities as they pursue professional excellence and mastery in their respective occupations and teams. Every member’s commitment towards professionalism and military effectiveness is valued, regardless of their level or professional journey, for example, whether excellence is achieved in meeting professional standards or mastery is pursued with an aim to create new professional standards. Excellence and mastery are concepts independent of progression in rank. Each of these many distinctions account for a part of the military professional’s identity as it relates to the functional imperative.
While highly diverse, the military professional’s identity is unified through a shared higher purpose and loyalty to serve the country. Upon enrolment into the profession, each member solemnly swears or affirms that they will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the Sovereign, their heirs and successors according to law. This oath or solemn affirmation finds itself reinforced by the military ethos’ three ethical principles of respecting the dignity of all persons, service to Canada before self, and obeying and supporting lawful authority. These principles further consolidate the multiple identities and aligns them with the societal imperative of serving Canada.
In addition to professional identities, the CAF encourages the respectful expression of one’s personal identity at work while simultaneously supporting an inclusive environment where everyone is not just welcomed, but valued. This inclusion and self-expression must be respectfully tempered through the provision of regulations relating to dress and deportment while on duty. These standards of military comportment are clearly articulated by the profession of arms, and it is the duty of military professionals to always uphold these standards. Through the balancing and respecting of individual and collective identities, military professionals enable inclusive organizations that create connections and cohesion which improves member well-being and ensures sustained military excellence.
The military function is an inherently human affair. It requires the collective efforts of inclusive leaders and teams with fighting spirit to prevail against the complexity of threats that face the nation. A cascading set of professional and personal identities that are aligned with the military ethos, that promote the development of strength of character within its people and trust between its members and security partners, enhance the military effectiveness needed to fulfil its responsibility to society.
The Impact of the Imperatives on Military Ethos
The military ethos is central to the profession of arms because it balances any potential tension that may manifest between the societal and functional imperatives within the profession. The ethical principles have primacy within the ethos because they ensure the subordination of the profession to Canada and its lawful authority in a respectful manner, reinforcing the profession’s higher purpose and loyalty in serving the nation.
The military values reinforce this service to country in several ways. First, the values are reflective of those of Canadian society, which are also critical for military effectiveness. Second, these values ensure that professional mastery is pursued in a loyal, consistent and accountable manner. Finally, the values ensure that trust and cohesion are developed to enhance military effectiveness. Combined, the ethical principles and military values represent the military’s professional character in how they achieve the functional imperative: military effectiveness. The societal imperative helps to define how we are to apply our military expertise in service to Canada.
Professional expectationsFootnote 84 are an articulation of both the functional and societal imperatives. These expectations make clear the competence that the profession needs to achieve mission success. The expectations demand an unwavering sense of duty, fighting spirit, collective mastery of professional competence, positive leadership, disciplined teamwork, and the long-term development and health of the profession.
It is the ethos that must be most closely adhered to if the CAF wishes to sustain the military’s level of professionalism now and into the future. It is only through a disciplined and ongoing practice of mastering the military ethos and one’s professional expertise that the highest standards of professionalism can be achieved. For this reason, it is without question that a personal commitment to living the military ethos must be considered a core military practice that is no less significant than the conduct of operations.
The Impact of the Imperatives on Military Responsibility
The imperatives impose upon the professional attribute of responsibility in two ways. First, through organizational responsibilities which are what the profession must do to fulfill its responsibility to society. Second, professional responsibilities relate to how the profession executes its mandate to maintain high standards of military effectiveness so that it can succeed in fulfilling its responsibility to government.
Organizational Responsibility
In Canada, the conditions of military service give rise to a set of reciprocal expectations between the profession and society. This is because CAF members serve voluntarily and members of the Regular Force accept that they are, at all times, liable to perform any lawful duty. This includes accepting the risk to health and life in performing military duty in hostile environments. Military professionals are also subject to a much higher standard of conduct and discipline.
Canadian society and the Government of Canada recognize certain formal and customary obligations to service members. These formal obligations manifest in the policies and programs that support military professionals through various aspects of service, for example, compensation, accommodation, support services to ensure their well-being, suitable recognition, and care and compensation for veterans and those injured in the service of Canada. It also includes the principle that every military professional be afforded professional development, reasonable career progression, fairness in military justice and administrative processes, and that they are resourced appropriately for the military tasks they are assigned. This level of institutional caring and stewardship is needed if military leaders are to be supported at the individual level in caring for their people and their families.Footnote 85
The profession of arms also has an organizational responsibility to communicate with the Canadian public. The CAF fulfils its responsibility to sustain its trustworthy relationship with Canadian society by communicating transparently what the profession is doing and how. A form of outreach, military professionals engage directly with Canadians individually and collectively through public ceremonies (such as Remembrance Day commemorations), professional engagements (like conferences and research activities), community outreach (such as charitable work and volunteerism) as well as media engagements (like air shows or demonstrations). The mediaFootnote 86 is a powerful vehicle for communicating what the profession does, and why. Additionally, the Reserve Force, including the Canadian Rangers and the COATS leaders, in communities and professions across the country sustain an important and powerful relationship that enhances the public and professional understanding of the CAF in Canada.
The democratically elected Government of Canada exercises civilian control of the military, through the Minister of National Defence, on behalf of the Canadian people. This responsibility establishes standards of public accountability and transparency as well as important relationships with several government institutions that include Parliament, parliamentary committees, and departments and agencies with defence and security responsibilities. Additional organizational responsibilities are imposed by fundamental legislation such as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Human Rights Act, the Official Languages Act, the Employment Equity Act, the Privacy Act, the Access to Information Act, the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Justice Act, and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, among others.
In turn, the CAF has the organizational responsibility to provide rigorous military advice and the loyal execution of political decisions. The CDS is the sole military professional responsible for providing this military advice to the MND and Cabinet on a wide array of issues that have military implications and play a key supporting role in the policy development process led by the Deputy Minister (DM). Specifically, the CDS provides advice on military requirements, capabilities and options, including when to commit military forces, how these forces should be used, and above all, the possible risks associated with such use of force. This advice must also include the consequences to professional effectiveness if the military is not provided adequate resources from government. The CDS holds ultimate accountability in this regard. Importantly, under the 2006 Accountability Act, the Deputy Minister is the ‘accounting officer’ reporting directly to Parliament on the financial administration of the department, which includes the CAF. This necessarily requires the DM to understand financial decision making across all functions.
At this political-strategic interface, uncertainty and ambiguity are constant factors in decision making. Military professionals recognize that defining clear political objectives under pressure is never easy for the civil authority. A complex mix of foreign and domestic considerations always plays a significant part in the process. Professional military advice must take these factors into consideration with a highly developed capacity for communicating risk assessment.
This approach to advice is echoed down the military chain of command whereby military subordinates provide fearless advice in planning, and then once a military commander takes a decision, the team obediently executes the plan within their commander’s intent. Given the evolving nature of joint, combined, and interagency availability and interactions on operations, there is constant collaboration at increasingly lower levels of the military with other government departments for the purposes of tactical planning within the bounds of the military strategy set by the CDS.
Professional Responsibility
Military members also have many professional responsibilities. Foremost among these is the requirement to maintain military effectiveness, in a word: readiness. This is carried out through a framework of force generation, management, sustainment, employment and force development. Character and competence in generating and employing forces across diverse domains—maritime, land, air, cyber and space—is imperative for military professionals.
The CDS is the chief steward and head of the profession of arms and, as its steward, is responsible to government and the Canadian people for its military effectiveness. In this capacity, the CDS is also the primary advocate for the health and well-being of its military personnel. The CDS is assisted with these responsibilities by the Canadian Armed Forces Chief Warrant Officer (CAFCWO). The CDS’s principal source of advice on professional matters is the Armed Forces Council (AFC). AFC may call upon subject matter experts to inform key decisions. Each of these AFC members have specific functional and command responsibilities towards the profession of arms. They also have a broader mandate to ensure that each command adheres to and reflects its foundational profession of arms doctrine and professionalism.
The commanders of the major commands (Royal Canadian Navy, Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Air Force, Canadian Special Operations Forces Command)Footnote 87 as well as the operational, functional and support commands (Canadian Joint Operations Command, Military Personnel Command and Canadian Forces Intelligence Command) are responsible for generating and maintaining forces at high readiness states for employment within the commands and the conduct of routine operations. This responsibility includes working to develop the appropriate pan-domain and joint doctrine, as well as joint training to validate high readiness forces for operational deployment. Strategic advice is provided on all aspects of their commands including related environmental, capability, operational and personnel matters. The Chief of Military Personnel (CMP), as the Commander of Military Personnel Command, is the principal professional advisor for strategic guidance on military personnel management matters over related functional areas.
The CAFCWO, as well as the Command Chief Warrant Officer/Petty Officer First Class (CCWO/CPO1) for each of the commands, as well as all Senior NCMs, start with the loyal implementation of leaders’ orders and share responsibility for the proper functioning of the profession, particularly in the areas of leadership, good order and discipline, dress and deportment, drill and ceremonial matters, service customs and traditions, and member well-being.
The CDS also relies on the cadre of General and Flag Officers and Senior Appointment Chief Warrant Officers/Chief Petty Officers First Class to exercise shared responsibility of these senior cadres for stewardship of the profession in addition to their individually assigned organizational responsibilities. Stewardship of the profession of arms demands the foresight for identifying and resourcing requirements to ensure that the profession remains relevant to society and government, as well as effective in countering current and emerging threats. This requires reassessing the expertise required to execute changing missions, new tasks and threats. In the face of changing social and cultural conditions, it requires reassessing the military ethos while preserving fundamental military values, Canadian values and universal virtues to ensure that the profession stays connected to society and remains militarily effective.
A new member of the CAF also has professional responsibilities. New members must focus on personal development, adherence to the CAF ethos through the daily practice of professionalism on an individual basis, and are supported by their leader’s active commitment to developing all their subordinates through socialization and experiential learning. As members rise in experience and rank, so does their responsibility for the leadership, well-being and professional development of other members of the profession. This starts with leaders committed to living and speaking the military ethos so that CAF operant culture is more closely aligned with its ethos. Finally, leaders strive to coach, mentor and develop the potential of all their subordinates equitably.
Lastly, military members may have a professional responsibility to allies and international organizations when the political decision is made to enter into such agreements. These responsibilities arise from membership in several international organizations and adherence to specific international treaties and agreements. It is the Government of Canada that enters into such treaties and agreements with other countries. Responsibilities that stem from such arrangements are then assigned based on the direction of the government to the CAF.
Such responsibilities to allies are significant and involve responsiveness to commitments, interoperability, and the evolution of combined operations. The respect accorded to Canadian military professionals by colleagues serving in allied militaries, through an extensive system of exchanges and liaison missions, is an important element of identity and it must be constantly earned. In such cases, the CAF will always retain responsibility over commands, formations, units and individuals who serve on alliance operations to ensure the priorities of the Government of Canada are maintained. CAF members who serve on alliance missions are representing Canada. As such, due care and consideration of cultural frameworks and differing legal frameworks between partners must be taken to help retain the CAF’s credibility.Footnote 88 Ultimately, a CAF member’s loyalty in these situations is always first to Canada and then the CAF, and must not succumb to the dangers of moral relativism. These exchanges and liaison missions involve both officers and senior NCMs attached to other national militaries, as well as several important international organizations such as NATO and the United Nations. Participation in a wide range of international exercises, practically on a continuous basis, directly improves professional competence and interoperability with allies.
Taken together, these professional responsibilities impose a particular and critical obligation on every member of the profession of arms to maintain and evolve professionalism in a direction that reinforces both the societal and functional imperatives of the profession. Military members are always representatives of the Government of Canada in the broadest sense. Even in the absence of any other agent or source of Canadian authority, military professionals must act to promote the country’s interest and well-being under all circumstances while reflecting Canadian military professionalism.
Section 5.4 – Conclusion
Both the military and the civil authority share responsibility for the defence of Canada as part of Canada’s broader national security community. This shared responsibility is tempered by an active control of the military by the democratically elected Government of Canada and manifests in practice as an integrated Defence Team composed of military and civilians. The four attributes of responsibility, expertise, identity and ethos all serve to address the functional and societal imperatives facing the profession of arms. While the imperatives are something that must be achieved, the attributes of the profession guide what and how each member of the profession of arms achieves them. The ethos in particular acts as the unifying concept in the profession of arms because it rationalizes both societal and functional imperatives within itself to generate professionalism. The final chapter of this book will examine how these aspirations are managed.
Page details
- Date modified: